RACK & ROLL Reaction

[=Martin=Taylor=]

Originally Posted by Tetraman

My thoughts? This game is boring. (read carefully to get my point please)

Where is the innovation that the past three years had in their design? First Frenzy gave us all multiple directions we could have taken our robot and the way the alliance worked in combination won the game. Triple Play introduced a new game piece, alliance structure, and a look into how we can manipulate it. Aim High took the boring ball and gave us a new system to use it with. Also there were periods and a critical auto-mode. I see nothing to go overly ballistic about, other than robot stacking.

I'm predicting that the robot design results are going to end up like Triple Play robots, where a vast majority of all them are going to look/act alike. It will all boil down to who's robot is faster. To me thats rather dull.

Now, I see game play as a different story. I can say I expect to see really fun matches, team working alliances, and crazy point totals. But the game, how it works, and how you win, is rather boring to me.

Unfortunately that is why this game is so hard. I keep coming up with designs in my head and then saying "No can't do that, everyone will do that."

Finding a niche will be very difficult.

On another note, just because the robots "look" the same doesn’t mean they will be the same. The crucial autonomous mode and the prospect of scoring on the other side of a goal where you can't see, present daunting programming challenges.

I think this will be a great year for software and sensor innovation.

[DanDon]

Originally Posted by Tetraman

Now wait...if you make a 110 pount robot, it HAS to be between 4 and 5 feet?

No, the maximum height would then be 5 feet.

[Pavan Dave]

Originally Posted by M.O.R.T.

Correct me if I'm wrong but, If it's 110lbs it can be from 0'-5'. If it's 111lbs it has to be 4 feet. Just an example, but still it works I think.

Originally Posted by Hachiban VIII

Unfortunately that is why this game is so hard. I keep coming up with designs in my head and then saying "No can't do that, everyone will do that."

Finding a niche will be very difficult.

On another note, just because the robots "look" the same doesn’t mean they will be the same. The crucial autonomous mode and the prospect of scoring on the other side of a goal where you can't see, present daunting programming challenges.

I think this will be a great year for software and sensor innovation.

I'm very sorry to say this but although many people will design many new robots. The winning teams will do research with previous games that had similar concepts etc. and maybe pick and choose wisely from old robots and than make their own of those ideas. I do not think that this game is challenging because of this reason. Last year for instance we had not had a game similar to this but this year this is basically a FIRST KICK OFF '9? Version 2.

Pavan.

[Brandon Holley]

this game looks effin sweet to me. I like how we have an open field to collect or pick up a tube, and then we have the complicated, yet fairly compact scoring object considering that all the scoring besides lifting bots will be done within that center structure.

I think the GDC went with this game to show how much these robots have progressed over the years. Although its similary to 97, its no where near the same game play. This is our chance to show that our robots are getting smarter, and way more advanced as we go through the years.

rack and roll is fine with me!

[JackN]

My feeling toward this game, interesting. It doesn't seem to be a high scoring game, with 90 being the average I think. The strategy will be interesting as well. Can two teams carry a RINGER score while one just lifts and plays D, will the vision system be as integral of a part this year, will Human or floor be the main scoring mode, one last thing you cant own every goal which makes it interesting.

[cfox2008]

This game looks pretty cool. My first thought was "Crap...gotta get the camera to work this year"...though it does look like it will be a little bit easier to implement this year.

[JaneYoung]

I'm thinking this game will be a crowd pleaser.
Easy to understand, wonderfully visual. Drama, excitement, collaboration oh my!

I think this will be a great year to invite folks to come see FIRST in action and share in the fun - the teams will be rocking. Go GDC!

[Lil' Lavery]

Originally Posted by Pavan

I'm very sorry to say this but although many people will design many new robots. The winning teams will do research with previous games that had similar concepts etc. and maybe pick and choose wisely from old robots and than make their own of those ideas. I do not think that this game is challenging because of this reason. Last year for instance we had not had a game similar to this but this year this is basically a FIRST KICK OFF '9? Version 2.

Pavan.

Pavan, please consult my earlier post in this thread for differences between this and the 1997 game, Toroid Terror. Even though both game used inner tubes and placed them onto poles, the strategies and robots will not be similar. Because robots could hold multiple tubes in 97, and the human players were granted much more freedom to interact with the robots, manipulators will have to be different than most of them in 97. Many of the competitive teams in 1997 didn't even attempt to load directly from the floor to their robots, but would push the tubes to their HP and have them load the tubes. A couple teams couldn't even score on the center tower at all, and just pushed tubes to their HP to let them score on it (it was far easier to throw tubes onto that goal, as their was to player station wall like there is now). While these may sound like minor differences, they greatly impacted robot design.

[Richard Wallace]

Tomorrow I'd like to try this: stand near the Rack (e.g., at station 1) holding a Ringer. Have two students stand near other parts of the Rack (stations 4 and 6) and randomly bump the bottom or middle Spider Arm Plates, while I try to put the Ringer on a Spider Arm at my station, using one hand.

I'm thinking this is going to be a test of my reaction time. And I'm thinking it would also test a driver's reaction time to try the same feat using a robot. I'm thinking that the CMU camera will only be able to tell the robot the time-average location of the swinging Spider Arm Plates.

I'm thinking that Rack scoring will be hard.

[gondorf]

my own personal opinion? that rack is VERY unstable. if 1-3 people can rotate it think what a full speed 120 lb robot can do if it rams the rack
***sees rack topple over on top another robot***

[LauraN]

Well, in regards to the complaints about the ease of scoring: I think this complaint comes up every year. That's most of the fun of FIRST- the games are complicated and dynamic, it's not like most traditional sports where you can easily keep track of goals scored. The scores go up as well as down, since there are usually ways for teams to "descore" the other alliance's points, plus the bonus points really make the last few seconds exciting. Also, the games only last a few minutes, so it's not like there's time to stop and explain and discuss the penalties and validity of the apparent scores as they happen (like when game pieces aren't fully within the goals or are touching other field elements and they aren't legally scored) So you know what? For better or for worse, I don't think there will ever be a FIRST game that's easy to score as a spectator.

I do agree, however, that the ability to only see one side of the rack during the match is going to make things very hard for everyone, and I'm not quite sure I like it. =/

[Jonathan Norris]

Originally Posted by 1derboy

My feeling toward this game, interesting. It doesn't seem to be a high scoring game, with 90 being the average I think. The strategy will be interesting as well. Can two teams carry a RINGER score while one just lifts and plays D, will the vision system be as integral of a part this year, will Human or floor be the main scoring mode, one last thing you cant own every goal which makes it interesting.

I think this will be a higher scoring game with the opportunity to realistically score 8 tubes in one row for 256 points, I will bet that it will happen at least once. I say that 2 tube scoring robots could do it if they focus on placing them up there early, then protect the spoilers from being placed on the top row (by taking them off). Seeing that you can't score for your opponents, what are you going to do when you have scored more than enough to win the game... score more. It will be a high scoring game, you can write this down.. we will see scores over 250 this year.

[DanDon]

Originally Posted by Jonathan Norris

I think this will be a higher scoring game with the opportunity to realistically score 8 tubes in one row for 256 points, I will bet that it will happen at least once. I say that 2 tube scoring robots could do it if they focus on placing them up there early, then protect the spoilers from being placed on the top row (by taking them off). Seeing that you can't score for your opponents, what are you going to do when you have scored more than enough to win the game... score more. It will be a high scoring game, you can write this down.. we will see scores over 250 this year.

That all depends on your opponents. All they need is to score 3 ringers, and theres no way you're getting a row of 8. In my opinion, the only way that'll happen is if the other alliance has no halfway decent tube scorers and no good defensive bots.

[IndySam]

Don't count on high scores. I think defense is being underestimated. A simple KOP robot could cause a sophisticated robot a lot of trouble. A well build defensive robot could cause havoc for an entire alliance.

I can think of at least one defensive strategy that teams must be able to counter that may not be so obvious.

[Pavan Dave]

Originally Posted by Jane

I'm thinking this game will be a crowd pleaser.
Easy to understand, wonderfully visual. Drama, excitement, collaboration oh my!

I think this will be a great year to invite folks to come see FIRST in action and share in the fun - the teams will be rocking. Go GDC!

\

Scoring is horrible to keep up with.
Not that great since if you are lucky you can see 5 sides at most, there is NO drama or excitement because it is a quick game not enough time for anything to happen besides a few bumps with bots.. No tipping expected until bonus.

Pavan.

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

Pavan, please consult my earlier post in this thread for differences between this and the 1997 game, Toroid Terror. Even though both game used inner tubes and placed them onto poles, the strategies and robots will not be similar. Because robots could hold multiple tubes in 97, and the human players were granted much more freedom to interact with the robots, manipulators will have to be different than most of them in 97. Many of the competitive teams in 1997 didn't even attempt to load directly from the floor to their robots, but would push the tubes to their HP and have them load the tubes. A couple teams couldn't even score on the center tower at all, and just pushed tubes to their HP to let them score on it (it was far easier to throw tubes onto that goal, as their was to player station wall like there is now). While these may sound like minor differences, they greatly impacted robot design.

Honestly, it is not the fact that they changed a FEW concepts of the game. It is still the same game to a degree. No matter what you do you are still putting tubes on poles. The fact of the matter is that they had around seven months to develop a challenging UNIQUE game yet they chose to modify an old one. That is my "beef" with FIRST.

Pavan.